Author

admin

Browsing

A plan to avert a partial government shutdown backed by President Donald Trump is heading for a House-wide vote on Tuesday.

The House Rules Committee, the final gatekeeper before legislation hits the House of Representatives chamber, advanced the bill along party lines on Monday evening. 

Tuesday is expected to first see a vote to allow for lawmakers to debate the bill, known as a ‘rule vote,’ followed by a chamber-wide vote on the legislation itself later in the afternoon.

It’s a major test for Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., as they seek to corral a House GOP conference that’s been exceptionally fractured on the subject of government funding.

As of late Monday evening, the bill’s chances of passing are still uncertain, even despite Trump himself making calls to potential holdouts.

Two sources told Fox News Digital that Vice President JD Vance will be on Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning for House Republicans’ regular conference meeting, in an apparent bid to help push dissenters along.

In addition to one staunch opponent, there are at least four other House Republicans who are undecided or leaning against the bill.

With all lawmakers present, Johnson will likely only be able to lose two Republicans to pass a bill along party lines.

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., told reporters he was ‘currently’ against the bill during the House’s 6 p.m. ET vote series.

‘I like the fact that it has less spending, but I hate the fact that they push it over to the war pimps at the Pentagon once again, and that’s kind of my hang-up,’ Burchett said, adding that he hadn’t heard from Trump at the time. 

Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., and Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., signaled they were undecided, with the latter signaling he was leaning against the bill.

‘I refuse to paint myself in the corner. I don’t think that’s a smart thing to do. But as it stands right now, it doesn’t make sense to say anything is going to be different in September than it is right now,’ McCormick said.

The bill is a continuing resolution (CR), which is a rough extension of fiscal 2024 funding levels to keep the government open through the start of fiscal 2026 on Oct. 1.

Republicans are largely expected to shoulder the bill alone in the House, despite a significant number of GOP lawmakers who would normally be opposed to extending Biden administration-era funding levels. House GOP leaders are confident, however, that it will pass.

Democrats have outnumbered Republicans in anti-government shutdown votes in recent years, but this time their opposition Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has many left-wing lawmakers signaling their opposition to the bill.

But what’s lending optimism to Johnson allies is the fact that two of the measure’s most vocal backers are the senior-most members of the hawkish House Freedom Caucus.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, the group’s policy chair, told Fox News Digital on Monday morning that a key part of conservatives’ pitch to fellow fiscal hawks is that Trump will likely still move to spend less money than the CR appropriates, including funding that he’s already blocked by executive order.

‘Step 1 is the CR freezes spending, guys, that’s a win; No. 2, no earmarks; No. 3, no giant omnibus; No. 4, we believe the president can impound,’ Roy said of his pitch.

Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris, R-Md., cited Republicans’ near-uniform vote on their Trump-backed federal budget bill last month.

‘There were a lot of people in Washington who said we would never pass a debt ceiling increase with only Republican votes, and we did in the House,’ Harris said. ‘I think, similarly, there’s some people who, including some of the Democrats, who think, ‘Well, they’re going to have to come to us, because they can never pass a continuing resolution with only Republican votes.’ And I think we’re going to see the same result [Tuesday].’

But with razor-thin margins, Johnson can afford precious little dissent to still pass the bill on party lines.

At least one Republican is already opposed: Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a staunch Johnson critic, wrote on X late Sunday, ‘Unless I get a lobotomy Monday that causes me to forget what I’ve witnessed the past 12 years, I’ll be a NO on the CR this week. It amazes me that my colleagues and many of the public fall for the lie that we will fight another day.’

The 99-page legislation was released over the weekend.

The bill allocates an additional $8 billion in defense spending to mitigate national security hawks’ concerns, while non-defense spending that Congress annually appropriates would decrease by about $13 billion.

There are also some added funds to help facilitate Immigrations and Customs Enforcement operations.

Cuts to non-defense discretionary spending would be found by eliminating some ‘side deals’ made during Fiscal Responsibility Act negotiations, House GOP leadership aides said. Lawmakers would also not be given an opportunity to request funding for special pet projects in their districts known as earmarks, another area that Republicans are classifying as savings.

It allows Republican leaders to claim a win on no meaningful government spending increases over fiscal 2025.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Don’t let mainstream media’s reaction to President Donald Trump’s Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy misinform. If Trump’s first-term foreign policy serves as any indication of how ‘pro-NATO’ and ‘anti-Russian’ his second-term foreign policy will be, the record is overwhelmingly pro-NATO and anti-Russian. 

Regardless of criticism – mostly by perennial Donald Trump critics – the president is no friend to Russia and his first term substantively reflects that.

As a former military officer and diplomat who served in Eastern Europe during the majority of Trump’s first term, I witnessed first-hand the tangible, unrelenting and effective anti-Russian and pro-NATO policies he directed American diplomats to communicate, influence and implement. 

The following is a list of specific foreign policies I witnessed and supported under from 2017 to 2020. 

Increasing NATO countries’ military spending to greater than 2% GDP

This policy was of the highest priority for military diplomats serving in NATO countries. The quantifiable policy was customized based on the specific military modernization needs of each NATO country. In the country I served in, Bulgaria, the policy resulted in the Bulgarian parliament approving the purchase of eight U.S. F-16 jets to the price of more than $1.3 billion as Bulgaria’s Air Force required drastic modernization. 

A more modernized and capable NATO (steered by American diplomatic pressure) focused on increased military spending… not good for Russia.

Lethal aid to Ukraine

Under President Trump – and in stark contrast to President Barack Obama’s Ukrainian policy – the U.S. provided lethal aid to Ukraine in the form of Javelins, aka tank killers. Javelins enabled the Ukrainians to gain a fighting chance on the eastern front of the conflict where they were historically losing. Ukrainian military attaches, whom I befriended and worked closely with during my time in Bulgaria, often embraced me and said, ‘Thank you, brother, we finally have a chance on the eastern front.’ 

A more capable and modernized Ukrainian military armed with Javelins… not good for Russia.

Largest expulsion of Russian diplomats in U.S. history

Following the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, United Kingdom, in 2018 by Russian agents, Prime Minister Theresa May implored President Trump to take a strong and symbolic diplomatic stance in support of Britian and in stern rebuke of Russia. Trump replied, ‘What can I do?’ 

In addition to 60 Russian diplomats being declared persona non grata and forced to leave the U.S., Trump ordered the permanent closure of the Russian Consulate in Seattle, Washington. On the international front, U.S. embassies all over the world further influenced local diplomatic action, resulting in several expulsions of Russian diplomats. 

Ordering the largest Russian diplomatic expulsion in U.S. history… not good for Russia.  

Sanctioned Russian gas pipeline Nord Stream 2

In December 2019, Trump formally sanctioned all companies involved with the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which sought to transport Russian fuel directly from Russia into Germany via the Baltic Sea. 

Trump, in an overarching diplomatic strategy to weaken Russian influence in Europe, began shaping the issue during a NATO breakfast in Brussels in 2018 when he openly stated, ‘Germany is totally controlled by Russia,’ adding the construction of the pipeline was ‘bad for NATO.’ Ultimately the pipeline never became operational, and Nord Stream 2 declared bankruptcy in 2022, laying off all 106 employees. 

Spearheading the demise of Russian fuel expansion into Germany… not good for Russia.

Whenever I hear the baseless criticisms of Trump’s foreign policy – particularly the thoughtless pro-Russian accusations – I wonder if the critics have any inclination to educate themselves on his actual policies, which were anything but friendly to the Russian government. 

As the president accurately stated in his address to Congress, Democrats would not be happy if he found a cure for the deadliest disease; the same can be said of his foreign policy critics. Coincidentally, the only U.S. presidential term Putin has not invaded a foreign country, dating back to 2008, was during Trump’s first term.

President Trump… not good for Russia.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Attorney General Pam Bondi spent the first month at the Justice Department arresting ISIS-linked terrorists and violent illegal immigrants, dismantling drug cartels and more, telling Fox News Digital she will ‘continue working day in and day out to deliver on President Trump’s Make America Safe Agenda.’

The Justice Department’s core mission under Bondi’s leadership is focused on fighting violent crime while undertaking key initiatives to protect women’s sports; eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion; and fight antisemitism. 

Since taking her oath Feb. 5, under Bondi’s leadership the DOJ has arrested an ISIS-linked criminal in New York who allegedly financially supported ISIS; arrested the ISIS-K attack planner who allegedly orchestrated the attack at Abbey Gate in Afghanistan that led to the death of 13 U.S. service members; and arrested two illegal immigrants accused of running one of the largest human smuggling rings in the United States. 

In March, the DOJ also secured custody of 29 defendants from Mexico who are facing charges in districts around the country relating to racketeering, drug-trafficking, murder, illegal use of firearms, money laundering and other crimes in the U.S., including Mexican drug lord Rafael Caro Quintero, who had been wanted for and accused of torturing and murdering a Drug Enforcement Administration agent in 1985. This followed a bilateral meeting with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and counterparts in the government of Mexico.

‘This Department of Justice is arresting violent terrorists, dismantling cartel networks, and rooting DEI out of American institutions,’ Bondi told Fox News Digital. ‘We will continue working day in and day out to deliver on President Trump’s Make America Safe Agenda.’

Bondi also warned California, Maine and Minnesota to comply with the federal antidiscrimination laws that require them to keep boys out of women’s sports or face legal action. 

She also vowed that the DOJ will ‘hold accountable states and state entities that violate federal law.’ 

The Justice Department also sued Illinois and New York earlier in February for defying federal immigration laws, with Bondi warning others that they ‘stand ready to sue states and state entities that defy federal antidiscrimination laws.’ 

Meanwhile, earlier in March, ISIS-K member Mohammad Sharifullah — accused of plotting the 2021 Abbey Gate bombing that killed 13 U.S. military members and at least 160 civilians amid the chaotic Biden administration withdrawal from Afghanistan — was extradited to ‘face American justice,’ FBI Director Kash Patel said. 

‘3 and 1/2 years later, justice for our 13,’ Patel wrote on X. 

Sharifullah is charged with providing and conspiring to provide material support and resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization resulting in death and was expected to make his first federal court appearance in Virginia Wednesday.

‘This is just the beginning,’ a Justice Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital. ‘Attorney General Bondi is completely dedicated in her mission to refocus the Department of Justice on fighting crime, prosecuting dangerous criminals, holding rogue jurisdictions accountable for flouting federal law, and removing DEI from our institutions.’ 

The spokesperson added: ‘The DOJ has more to come on all those fronts and more.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Everyone supports cutting government spending, until someone actually begins to cut government spending. Then, all Hell breaks loose. 

Why? Because with a $6 trillion federal budget, far too many politicians and activists (and donors and universities and corporations) have their hands in the till. As Senator John Kennedy, R-La., has memorably said, when you start to cut the fat, the pigs will squeal.

On cue, Democrats are squealing. It turns out that they benefit from some of the wasteful spending being exposed by the Trump White House, as monies designated for addressing climate change, for instance, inappropriately flow to leftist think tanks and non-profits. 

Thanks to the work of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Americans are getting a quick education on the ‘soft’ corruption corroding our government. It is not pretty. In his address to Congress, President Trump listed several idiotic expenditures of government monies; studies on transgender mice (which CNN and others wrongly claimed didn’t exist) received a lot of attention, and rightly so. Those disclosures   may be why a new Rasmussen poll shows two-thirds of the country agree that it’s time to ‘drain the swamp.’  

Democrats disagree; in an effort to undermine Elon Musk and President Donald Trump, they are fearmongering, warning voters that DOGE or Republicans in Congress are going to slash Medicaid benefits. President Trump is on record saying his government will not cut that program, but will investigate fraudulent payments.

House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, recently said the GOP House spending bill would ‘set in motion the largest Medicaid cut in American history.’ New York Representative Mike Lawler disputed Jeffries’ claim, saying ‘show me where in the budget resolution it talks about specific cuts. It doesn’t.’ Lawler is correct, but Democrats insist that the plan’s $880 billion expected cut in spending from programs under the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction, like healthcare outlays, prove the program will be gutted. 

The truth is that simply rooting out fraudulent payments from Medicaid (and Medicare) would go a long way towards providing that sort of savings. Last year, the GAO reported ‘improper payments’ from federal Medicaid outlays amounted to $51.3 billion in 2023 (and Medicare’s improper payments totaled another $51 billion). The Medicaid figurewas significantly higher in prior years, and only fell because of ‘flexibilities granted to states during the COVID-19 public health emergency.’ In 2021, fraudulent payments totaled $103.4 billion and in 2022 totaled $83.1 billion. The GAO warns the improper payments rate is likely headed higher. 

Medicaid spending has more than doubled over the past decade, despite real median incomes expanding by 14% and the poverty rate plunging from 14% to 11.5%. There were 48.3 million Americans living in poverty in 2013 in the U.S.; by 2022 that number had dropped to 41.9 million. Given that Medicaid is mainly a program targeting low-income Americans, the numbers  do not make sense.

One reason that Medicaid has grown so rapidly is that President Obama and then President Joe Biden instituted changes that encouraged enrollment expansion. When Barack Obama took office in 2009, there were 51 million Americans receiving Medicaid; by the end of his presidency, there were 74 million, a rise of 45%. Obama encouraged greater participation by loosening work requirements for receiving Medicaid. President Trump allowed states to reimpose that demand during his first White House term; as a consequence, in part, the number of enrollees in Medicaid barely budged, rising from 74 to 76 million. Had it not been for the COVID outbreak, the number would likely have stagnated under Trump. 

President Biden, in the year before he expected to run for a second term, pushed through rules changes that significantly increased Medicaid’s enrollment and costs, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services. The CMS estimated the federal cost of Biden’s rules at between $68.5 billion and $134.8 billion over five years. One rule weakens the eligibility requirements of enrollees in part by mandating that state Medicaid programs discount pensions, annuities and retirement funds in determining income levels.

In addition, some states, like New York, have allowed illegal immigrants to receive Medicaid; that has boosted the numbers as well. 

Why do Democrats work to expand Medicaid? Because, like any other benefit, recipients often reward state officials for their supposed generosity, indifferent to the costs. Democrat-run New York, for example, spent $94.6 billion on Medicaid in fiscal 2023, or more than $4,800 for each resident; that was 82% above the national average. The state alone paid out $1,800 per capita on Medicaid, more than double the U.S. average of $835. 

Readying their opposition to trimming the program’s out-of-control outlays, Democrats invited Medicaid beneficiaries to attend Trump’s address to Congress, hoping to highlight their dependence on the program. During the speech, Democrats chanted and waved lollipop signs that said ‘SAVE MEDICAID;’ as it happened, their embarrassing shenanigans – and especially their sullen refusal to applaud a young cancer victim or a hostage brought home from Russia – drowned out their message.

They will not stop, however. Progressive mouthpiece Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said on Instagram after the speech: ‘Trump not mentioning Medicaid at the State of the Union is the game. He doesn’t talk about it, what he fears, and he knows it’s dynamite.’ 

It actually may turn out to be dynamite, an explosive issue favoring Republicans. A new survey by pollster Scott Rasmussen reveals that ‘71% of voters support reducing growth of Medicaid spending by removing illegal immigrants and requiring able-bodied recipients to work. 88% of Republicans and 51% of Democrats back the proposal.’ 

If even a majority of Democrats agrees that Medicaid spending has to be curtailed, the mandate for reform is stark.  My view: cut spending that nearly everyone agrees is ‘unsustainable’ and let them squeal.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested at Manila Ninoy Aquino International Airport on Tuesday following an order from the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is investigating a crime against humanity case filed against the former leader.

Duterte, 79, was taken into custody at the airport in the Philippines following his trip to Hong Kong, The Associated Press reports.

The ICC has been investigating ‘massive killings that happened under the former president’s deadly crackdown against illegal drugs,’ The AP said via President Ferdinand Marcos’ office.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Greenlanders will head to the polls to vote in their country’s parliamentary election on Tuesday, in what will likely prove to be a historic vote not because of any seismic shifts within the nation but because of the geopolitical message it will send.

Independence from Denmark is not on the ballot itself, but who is elected to Greenland’s parliament will signal how the country could move forward in not only divorcing itself from Copenhagen, but in handling what some critics have perceived as threats issued by President Donald Trump.

Parliamentary elections on the world’s largest island, a nation of less than 60,000 people, have previously picked up scant coverage due to their relatively low impact on world affairs.

But all that changed in January when, ahead of his inauguration, Trump refused to rule out the possibility of ‘acquiring’ Greenland through economic or military means and has since repeated his interest in the strategically important island.

While the majority of Greenlanders support independence from Denmark, they also align in their opposition to Trump’s ambitions for the island nation.

There is not a single lawmaker in Greenland that ran for election in this cycle on becoming a part of the U.S., but the leading opposition party known as Naleraq, which currently holds just five of the 31 seats in Greenland’s parliament, may have a solution to achieve independence while also appealing to Trump’s interests. 

Qupanuk Olsen, a 39-year-old running under the Naleraq party who has garnered a massive social media presence with over a million followers spread over Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, shared a video in January where she addressed questions regarding her opinion on the matter.

Without directly noting her position on Trump’s ambitions, as she said she wants to keep her social media presence as ‘A-political as possible,’ she emphasized her support for expanding Greenland’s partnerships.

‘I strongly believe in Greenland’s independence,’ she went on to say, ‘To achieve this we must expand our collaborations and establish business relationships with countries beyond Denmark. 

‘We Greenlanders, Kalaallit, deserve to be independent,’ she continued in reference to the Greenlandic Inuit ethnic group. ‘And I hope we will strengthen our connections with our fellow Inuit in Canada and Alaska significantly more in the near future.’

Though Greenland won self-rule in 1979, with Denmark continuing to oversee issues relating to defense and foreign policy, the Naleraq party has pushed for a swift transition to complete independence.

The leading opposition party has argued this could be achieved by bolstering existing business opportunities like its fishing industry, as well as by establishing defensive agreements with nations like the U.S., in which it would allow Washington to continue to operate its military interests from the island in exchange for security assurances without becoming a U.S. territory. 

Though it remains unclear if such a deal would win over Trump, who could be viewing the Artic nation as an untapped opportunity for its rare earth minerals and oil and gas reserves – which Greenland has blocked even the EU from accessing. 

The White House did not respond to Fox News Digital’s questions over whether expanding ties with Greenland would appease Trump’s ambitions, though on Sunday Trump reiterated his position on the island nation.

‘As I made clear during my Joint Address to Congress, the United States strongly supports the people of Greenland’s right to determine their own future,’ he said on his social media platform Truth Social.  ‘We will continue to keep you safe, as we have since World War II.’ 

‘We are ready to invest billions of dollars to create new jobs and make you rich  – And, if you so choose, we welcome you to be a part of the Greatest Nation anywhere in the World, the United States of America,’ he added. 

Trump drew rebuke in some quarters following his address to Congress, where his tone on Greenland was softer than previous remarks, but he concluded by saying, ‘One way or the other, we’re going to get it.’

According to a January poll, some 85% of Greenlanders oppose Trump’s push to make Greenland a part of the U.S., including Prime Minister Mute Egede, who has been not only a huge proponent of independence from Denmark, but who has also been staunchly opposed to Trump’s interest in Greenland.

Egede’s Inuit Ataqatigiit party, which currently holds 11 seats, is expected to pick up an even greater majority following the Tuesday election. 

Egede, who has repeatedly told the U.S. president that Greenland is ‘not for sale,’ on Monday said Trump’s unpredictability was sowing international chaos.

‘The things that are happening in the world right now worry me quite a lot,’ Egede told Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR). ‘There is a world order that is faltering on many fronts, and perhaps a president in the United States who is very unpredictable in a way that makes people feel insecure.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

House Republicans are accusing Democrats of waging their opposition campaign against the GOP’s government funding plan over their fury at Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) efforts.

‘They hate Elon Musk and Donald Trump more than they love their country,’ Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., told Fox News Digital. ‘They’re just losing their f—— minds.’

Mace was still optimistic that some Democratic lawmakers will vote for the legislation on Tuesday afternoon, ‘I mean, they voted for every CR under the sun when [former President Joe Biden] was president. That’s what this is — it’s just political games.’

First-term Rep. Jeff Crank, R-Colo., told Fox News Digital, ‘It’s either [President Donald Trump] or Elon Musk or a combination thereof, right?’

‘They’ve had nothing but political losses from November forward. Last week was the worst political loss I think they’ve suffered in a long time,’ Crank said, referring to Democrats’ intra-party divisions over some lawmakers’ disruptions during Trump’s speech to Congress. ‘I guess they’ve got to keep fighting, but what they should do is the right thing: Keep the government open.’

Musk and his DOGE work have been met with near-universal condemnation by Democrats, even those who have agreed with the need to cut the federal bureaucracy. 

Democrats have held Musk up as a political boogeyman, an unelected billionaire who was given too much access to the federal government that he also profits from as a military contractor.

But Republicans, with some exceptions, have defended his work as necessary.

Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., told Fox News Digital that Musk is ‘doing damage to our government’ but denied his work being a factor in his likely decision to oppose the funding bill.

‘Musk doesn’t live rent-free in my head,’ Crow said. ‘I’m not making legislative decisions based upon Elon Musk and what he does and doesn’t do in any given day… I’m focusing on my constituents.’

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., when asked about Musk, did not mention the billionaire at all. Instead, he pivoted to criticize House Republicans for putting a stopgap government funding bill known as a continuing resolution (CR) up for a vote, rather than dealing with a fresh slate of fiscal year (FY) 2025 appropriations bills.

‘Republicans have said for the longest time, right, that CRs are no longer the way to fund the government. Speaker Johnson promised to do individual spending bills. That was his pitch to his colleagues in order to remain speaker. OK. He’s the one who’s going back on his word to his own colleagues,’ Moskowitz said.

But Democrats have nevertheless used Musk in their public broadsides against the bill.

‘It takes away veterans’ healthcare. It takes away critical research funding. Those are the things that House Republicans are willing to do just to give Elon Musk and Donald Trump’s friends continued tax breaks. That’s unacceptable to House Democrats,’ House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., told reporters on Monday.

Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., wrote on X, ‘Trump and Musk are illegally shutting down federal agencies, mass firing federal workers, and freezing congressionally mandated funding. It’s causing massive job losses and economic chaos for my constituents, and the Republican CR would continue this disaster. I will vote no.’

The proposed CR roughly freezes government funding at FY 2024 levels through the beginning of FY 2026, on Oct 1. It includes extra funding for defense while cutting nondefense funding by roughly $13 billion.

House GOP leadership aides said over the weekend that the bill includes some added funding for veterans’ healthcare — putting them at odds with Democrats’ messaging.

Democratic lawmakers normally vote in droves to avert a government shutdown, but this time it’s likely House Republicans will need to share the burden largely on their own.

As of Monday night, several Republicans are still undecided on how they will vote, despite Trump making calls to GOP lawmakers who are on the fence.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The Trump Organization sued Capital One in Florida on Friday for allegedly “unjustifiably” closing more than 300 of the company’s bank accounts on the heels of the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol by a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters.

The lawsuit said that the Trump Organization and related entities “have reason to believe that Capital One’s unilateral decision came about as a result of political and social motivations and Capital One’s unsubstantiated, ‘woke’ beliefs that it needed to distance itself from President Trump and his conservative political views.”

“In essence, Capital One ‘de-banked’ Plaintiffs’ Accounts because Capital One believed that the political tide at the moment favored doing so,” the Trump Organization claims in the civil case filed in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court in Miami-Dade County.

The suit seeks a declaratory judgment that the bank improperly terminated the Trump companies’ accounts in June 2021, as well as punitive and other monetary damages for what the suit alleged was “the devastating impact” of the terminations on the companies’ ability to transact and access their funds.

The closures came more than four months after the riot at the U.S. Capitol, which began after Trump for weeks falsely claimed that he had won the 2020 presidential election over former President Joe Biden.

The suit’s named plaintiffs are the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, DJT Holdings, DJT Holdings Managing Member, DTTM Operations, and Eric Trump, the president’s son, who with his brother, Donald Trump Jr., runs the Trump Organization.

The complaint says the plaintiffs and affiliated entities held hundreds of accounts at Capital One for decades before they were closed. Eric Trump said the amount of damages suffered by the companies is “millions of dollars.”

Alejandro Brito, a lawyer who is representing the Trump Organization in the suit, told CNBC the company “is contemplating other suits against financial organizations that engaged in similar conduct.”

Brito said Capital One’s actions “was an attack on free speech.”

A spokesperson for the bank wrote in an email to CNBC, “Capital One has not and does not close customer accounts for political reasons.”

Eric Trump said in a statement, “The decision by Capital One to ‘debank’ our company, after well over a decade, was a clear attack on free speech and free enterprise that flies in the face of the bedrock principles and freedoms that define our country.”

“Moreover, the arbitrary closure of these accounts, without justifiable cause, reflects a broader effort to silence and undermine the success of the Trump Organization and those who dare to express their political views,” said Eric Trump.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

For years, American financial companies have fought the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — the chief U.S. consumer finance watchdog — in the courts and media, portraying the agency as illegitimate and as unfairly targeting industry players.

Now, with the CFPB on life support after the Trump administration issued a stop-work order and shuttered its headquarters, the agency finds itself with an unlikely ally: the same banks that reliably complained about its rules and enforcement actions under former Director Rohit Chopra.

That’s because if the Trump administration succeeds in reducing the CFPB to a shell of its former self, banks would find themselves competing directly with nonbank financial players, from big tech and fintech firms to mortgage, auto and payday lenders, that enjoy far less federal scrutiny than Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.-backed institutions.

“The CFPB is the only federal agency that supervises non-depository institutions, so that would go away,” said David Silberman, a veteran banking attorney who lectures at Yale Law School. “Payment apps like PayPal, Stripe, Cash App, those sorts of things, they would get close to a free ride at the federal level.”

The shift could wind the clock back to a pre-2008 environment, where it was largely left to state officials to prevent consumers from being ripped off by nonbank providers. The CFPB was created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis that was caused by irresponsible lending.

But since then, digital players have made significant inroads by offering banking services via mobile phone apps. Fintechs led by PayPal and Chime had roughly as many new accounts last year as all large and regional banks combined, according to data from Cornerstone Advisors.

“If you’re the big banks, you certainly don’t want a world in which the non-banks have much greater degrees of freedom and much less regulatory oversight than the banks do,” Silberman said.

The CFPB and its employees are in limbo after acting Director Russell Vought took over last month, issuing a flurry of directives to the agency’s then 1,700 staffers. Working with operatives from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, Vought quickly laid off about 200 workers, reportedly took steps to end the agency’s building lease and canceled reams of contracts required for legally mandated duties.

In internal emails released Friday, CFPB Chief Operating Officer Adam Martinez detailed plans to remove roughly 800 supervision and enforcement workers.

Senior executives at the CFPB shared plans for more layoffs that would leave the agency with just five employees, CNBC has reported. That would kneecap the agency’s ability to carry out its supervision and enforcement duties.

That appears to go beyond what even the Consumer Bankers Association, a frequent CFPB critic, would want. The CBA, which represents the country’s biggest retail banks, has sued the CFPB in the past year to scuttle rules limiting overdraft and credit card late fees. More recently, it noted the CFPB’s role in keeping a level playing field among market participants.

“We believe that new leadership understands the need for examinations for large banks to continue, given the intersections with prudential regulatory examinations,” said Lindsey Johnson, president of the CBA, in a statement provided to CNBC. “Importantly, the CFPB is the sole examiner of non-bank financial institutions.”

Vought’s plans to hobble the agency were halted by a federal judge, who is now considering the merits of a lawsuit brought by a CFPB union asking for a preliminary injunction.

A hearing where Martinez is scheduled to testify is set for Monday.

In the meantime, bank executives have gone from antagonists of the CFPB to among those concerned it will disappear.

At a late October bankers convention in New York, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon encouraged his peers to “fight back” against regulators. A few months before that, the bank said that it could sue the CFPB over its investigation into peer-to-peer payments network Zelle.

“We are suing our regulators over and over and over because things are becoming unfair and unjust, and they are hurting companies, a lot of these rules are hurting lower-paid individuals,” Dimon said at the convention.

Now, there’s growing consensus that an initial push to “delete” the CFPB is a mistake. Besides increasing the threat posed from nonbanks, current rules from the CFPB would still be on the books, but nobody would be around to update them as the industry evolves.

Small banks and credit unions would be even more disadvantaged than their larger peers if the CFPB were to go away, industry advocates say, since they were never regulated by the agency and would face the same regulatory scrutiny as before.

“The conventional wisdom is not right that banks just want the CFPB to go away, or that banks want regulator consolidation,” said an executive at a major U.S. bank who declined to be identified speaking about the Trump administration. “They want thoughtful policies that will support economic growth and maintain safety and soundness.”

A senior CFPB lawyer who lost his position in recent weeks said that the industry’s alignment with Republicans may have backfired.

“They’re about to live in a world in which the entire non-bank financial services industry is unregulated every day, while they are overseen by the Federal Reserve, FDIC and OCC,” the lawyer said. “It’s a world where Apple, PayPal, Cash App and X run wild for four years. Good luck.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Syria’s interim president, Ahmad al-Sharaa, called for national unity Sunday, describing the outbreak of violence between government forces and supporters of ousted former President Bashar al-Assad as “expected challenges.”

Hundreds of people have reportedly been killed, with eyewitnesses accusing government supporters of carrying out execution-style killings.

“What is happening in the country are expected challenges. We must preserve national unity and civil peace in the country,” Sharaa said at a mosque in Damascus he said he used to pray at two decades ago.

“We are capable of living together in this country, as much as we can,” he added.

The clashes have killed at least 311 people in Syria since Thursday, according the UK-based independent monitoring group the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), which warned the actual death toll could be much higher.

Militants loyal to Assad have killed a further 147 people – 26 civilians and 121 security forces, SNHR’s director Fadel Abdul Ghani said.

The ongoing clashes are the worst outbreak of violence since Assad – a member of the minority Alawite sect – was toppled in December by Sunni Islamist militants who sought to reshape the country’s political and sectarian order.

Latakia and Tartous on the Mediterranean coast are areas where support among Syrian Alawites for Assad was strong. Alawites – some 10% of the population – were prominent in the Assad regime, and while many Alawites have surrendered their weapons since December, many others have not.

The latest surge in violence highlights the challenges Syria’s new regime faces in appeasing disenfranchised groups, especially those that remain heavily armed.

This post appeared first on cnn.com